Daughter of Dracula (1972)

Britt Nichols plays Luisa Karlstein who visits her terminally ill mother. Rather coldly, the rest of the family appears to have turned up simply to stand and watch as the ill old Baroness succumbs to death. With her dying breath, she tells her daughter of a family curse.Even before this reveal, a number of ongoing, gruesome murders have been occurring. Nubile young women, often in a state of undress, have been spied upon and are then killed by what is clearly a female vampire.As always for Jesus Franco films, such story-line as there is meanders greatly with protracted scenes of women in jeopardy, and is enlivened by ongoing scenes of soft-core sex - here, Karlstein reveals her lesbian tendencies in a number of scenes which have no bearing on the wafer-thin plot-line. This is usual for such films, as is the stunning leading lady - here, Nichols continues the tradition of delights such as Lina Romay and Soledad Miranda, but doesn't seem to have attracted the same level of attention. This may be because her appearance bolsters a film that is otherwise desperately reserved for Franco's style than a more general audience. Some time regular Anne Libert gives her usual effective and mesmerising performance as Karine.Even the eroticism here is ... odd. There is a routine in which a 'dancer' (prior to her murder, of course) simply rolls around on the floor in a red lit nightclub. She is clearly performing an act (as opposed to suffering a fit). People watch in stony silence, she rolls around some more, smiling. Then, she stands up and they applaud! Why? It is only shocking because she wasn't escorted out of the place by medics. Where is the exotic eroticism of 'Vampyros Lesbos' or 'She Killed in Ecstasy?' Whilst hardly polished films themselves, they did nevertheless escape the drudgery that fuels each dialogue-heavy scene here.A constant delight with Franco films is the juxtaposition of horror set in beautifully filmed, exotic sun-kissed locations. Such visual conflict often works, but not so much here, for what panoramic views we get of Portugal (where this is filmed) are rare and the footage is often used more than once.Back to whatever passes as a story, and it appears that the undead Count Karlstein (Franco regular Howard Vernon, robbed of dialogue here) is in fact Dracula himself. He doesn't get to contribute a huge amount. In fact, his two scenes involve simply rising from his coffin, watched by a horrified Luisa, shortly before she too becomes a vampire. And yet, his wide-eyed somnambulism offers an interesting take on a more bestial Dracula - it's just a shame he hasn't more to do.What begins as an interesting idea soon becomes choppy viewing, with one scene following another with little or no obvious cohesion or structure. Little effort is made to make any of the events entertaining or horrific or even particularly sexy. Among the points in its favour - we are treated to many brave close-ups of teeth baring fangs. Brave because, such close-ups invite scrutiny, but the fangs are very realistic - something the otherwise superior 'exploitation' film-maker Jean Rollin couldn't always get right.Despite the flaws, I actually rate this quite highly because it is Franco at his ... Franco-ist! The mood is suitably strange and ethereal, and there is a sense of the unnerving, despite the lack of any obvious choices to make it so. The choice of locations, always one of Franco's greatest talents help immeasurably, and the musical score by Daniel White is, as always, terrific.

This is a Dracula sequel and it is very scary. If this film does not scary you know movie will. This movie has great acting. It also has a great story line. It also has great special effects. It also has great acting. It very scary. If you get a come a cross it see it. It is very scary. Britt Nichols is a great actress. Dracula (March 1931) is better. But still this is good horror movie. One of the scariest movies from the 70's. You will not want to see it alone. Dracula (1992) is better. This does not have same story line has Dracula's Daughter from 1936. Dracula's Daughter (1936) is better. This is a very scary movie. This movie is a must see.

Jess Franco's Dracula's Daughter is a bit of a combination of genre styles that were popular in 1972. Its part lesbian vampire film, part giallo and part sexploitation. In fairness it isn't all that successful in any of those sub-genres. The reason I guess is a common one when it comes to Franco and that's that it seems to have been knocked together too quickly for its own good. You can't help but think that there's the basis of a decent film here but it ultimately doesn't add up to a great deal.The vampire part of the story is never developed very clearly and there aren't any actual scary horror moments. In fact poor Howard Vernon plays Count Dracula but never even gets to get out of his coffin. I haven't really got any good idea why this is so but that's just the way it is. Similarly, the giallo thread is sort of there but at no point does Franco go to the trouble of generating any actual suspense (does he ever?) so it really doesn't add an awful lot and ultimately promises more than it delivers. While from a sexploitation perspective I can't say it was too erotic, the titillation is strictly forgettable. Sometimes Franco really needs a great leading lady like Soledad Miranda to make this kind of stuff work but he doesn't have anyone of that high calibre here unfortunately.It's not a complete wash out though. There is some decent photography at times, and the locations are pretty nice. While the typical Franco weirdness is always sort of interesting to watch. This is not one of his better films. Having said that it sure isn't one of his worst either. I guess ultimately it's one that can only really be recommended to Franco fans; for everyone else, enter at your own risk.

A women is murdered in her bath by a sinister individual dressed in black. In a manor-house near the scene of the crime, Baroness Karlstein wakes up with a start. She is gravely ill and is only awaiting the arrival of her granddaughter Luisa before dying. When Luisa arrives, her grandmother tells her of the curse that has haunted the family for generations, revealing that the first Baron Karlstein was a vampire, and gives her the key to the chapel. Luisa decides to move into the manor with her uncle Baron Max Karlstein and her cousin, Karine. The only fly in the ointment is the presence of the highly intelligent caretaker, Cyril Jefferson...This movie was more improvised than well done. It is a very curious film and also very boring. Howard Vernon, as a sort of count Dracula, is only here to justify the title of the film. His scenes are too short, just lying in his coffin, eyes open are showing off his teeth.. Fun in a way...Britt Nichols is very beautiful as always, and her lesbian scenes with Anne Libert are the best you can get from LA FILLE DE Dracula. But, there are too many tight close-ups to really enjoy it! Some captivating unreal atmosphere kept me watching from beginning to end... But, as always with most of Jess Franco films, you must be a bit of a masochist to enjoy these piece of...cinema!